Amuri v. Garland
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
Amuri v. Garland
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Jafari Amuri,
Case No. 24-CV-1941 (KMM/JFD)
Petitioner,
v. ORDER
Merrick Garland, Attorney General of
United States, et al.,
Respondents.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and
Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate John F. Docherty, dated August
29, 2024. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted.
The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific
objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County,563 F. Supp. 3d 946
, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon,73 F.3d 793, 795
(8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court's careful review of
the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear
or otherwise, and the R&R is accepted in full.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, [ECF 1], is DENIED
without prejudice as moot.
Let judgment be entered.
Date: December 16, 2024 s/ Katherine M. Menendez
Katherine M. Menendez
United States District Judge Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Jafari Amuri,
Case No. 24-CV-1941 (KMM/JFD)
Petitioner,
v. ORDER
Merrick Garland, Attorney General of
United States, et al.,
Respondents.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and
Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate John F. Docherty, dated August
29, 2024. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted.
The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific
objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County,563 F. Supp. 3d 946
, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon,73 F.3d 793, 795
(8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court's careful review of
the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear
or otherwise, and the R&R is accepted in full.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, [ECF 1], is DENIED
without prejudice as moot.
Let judgment be entered.
Date: December 16, 2024 s/ Katherine M. Menendez
Katherine M. Menendez
United States District Judge Reference
- Status
- Unknown